[atrt2] Summary of WHOIS RT Rec Impl for body of report.

[Steve Crocker]

Thanks.  I take your point and appreciate the invitation.

I'm squeezed for time at this point.  I will try to find a small window of quality time to draft suggested alternative wording; not sure if I will be able to do so prior to 3:00 p.m. PDT deadline.

Steve

On Oct 11, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> Steve, the statement was not meant to imply that it was a conscious Board decision to prioritize the EWG over the RT Rec, thus the phrase "reinforced this PERCEPTION". 
> 
> The fact that there was this perception among many is fact. We have comments that said just that (and a number of personal discussions both prior to and during ATRT), and even one who was grateful that the EWG was going to consider the RT Recs as part of their mandate. And the wording in the SSAC report DID imply to many that they were saying do this before the RT Recs. Both Patrick and James (in private conversation) acknowledged that it could be read that way, but left it as is.
> 
> Can you suggest wording that keep the meaning without implying that the Board meant to give this impression.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 11/10/2013 01:31 AM, Steve Crocker wrote:
>> Alan, et al,
>> 
>> This seems like a pretty good summary.  I have taken exception to one passage, which I've highlighted and added a comment.
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:45 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>> 
>> > Sorry about the delay in getting this in.
>> > 
>> > Alan<Summary for report body.docx>_______________________________________________
>> > atrt2 mailing list
>> > atrt2 at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131011/f91962cf/attachment-0001.html>